Amazon not releasing new Woody Allen movie as planned

Originally published at:


When I was in high school (mid-90s) I really liked Woody Allen films. Then I read his biography. After that it seemed to me that he wasn’t so much inspired by or paying homage to comedians like the Marx Brothers; he was straight ripping them off.


I’m done with him. It’s hard enough to watch his older (funny and less funny) movies with everything that’s come out about him.


Now that it’s no longer slated to arrive in 2018, this will be the first year without a new Woody Allen movie since 1981.

Wow. He’s a busy guy. A busy, busy… guy. So to speak.


Lesser artists borrow, great artists steal.

–Igor Stravinsky


He’s had a movie every year?!?
I had no idea! :hushed:


I suddenly had a vision of Jared Kushner as the main character of a Woody Allen film about a nervous dope who gets in way over his head after his shiksa wife gets him involved in her father’s business.


Wonder if this was going to be a remake of Sunday in New York:

1 Like

Yeah. Even with the molestation issue aside, he’s not made a good movie in more than half-a-dozen years anyways. I gave up on him just due to the (lack of) strength of his work years ago, before I was really aware of the accusations. In the context of his personal life, it’s hard to even watch his older, better movies now.

But holy crap, I thought “this will be the first year without a new Woody Allen movie since 1981” was a joke, but no, looking at IMDB, since 1958 there’s only three or four years where he didn’t put something out, and on average has produced at least one film/tv movie a year during that period.


Somebody should write that movie, though not Allen. I nominate Bill Burr.

So we the people have declared him guilty of what we’ve read in the news. We should string him up as an example to all the other people alleged to have done bad things. Trump would be proud of our stance. Maybe he’ll realise that courts and laws are a waste of money and that the US taxpayer will be saved time, money and trouble if we just let public kangaroo courts decide whether someone should be allowed to live/work/exist or not.

Vigilantes! Make America safe again! (We missed the boat on Michael Jackson. Let’s not repeat that mistake!)


The rule of law is important, no doubt. However, it’s important to keep in mind that courts are not infallible (e.g. Central Park Five)—and the court of public opinion isn’t destined to always be wrong; although the allegations against Allen were dismissed by a judge, it’s entirely possible that the judge did so incorrectly.

Anyway, I’m curious: why do you consider Dylan Farrow’s allegations to be not credible?

ETA: Sorry, maybe I shouldn’t assume, based on your rhetoric, that you don’t believe Dylan Farrow. Anyway, I’m curious: Do you believe her? Why or why not?


just before everyone in the world remembered that sexual abuse is bad

right. so why is it, that not a single word from the boingboing-staff mentioned the asia-argento-case, which nearly exploded the last 2 weeks?!? you aint hypocrites, aint ya?

and her defending sounds EXACTLY like the defending from most abusers, who happen to be men.

bullshit, asia; he was the lead in your movie, as he was 7 years old, you chattet with him the following years and you didnt know his age?!? oh, and the horny kid jumped you?!? well, he said YOU did.

so, is there coming ANY mention of this on BoingBoing or are you decided thats nothing more than a sidenote on the #metoo-movement which isnt important enough to write about it?

did he said that? I must have overlooked that sentence…

On someone’s recommendation I watched the recent “Match Point” and thought it was actually quite good – even if you seethe with hatred at Woody Allen you can probably justify watching that one because some people think it’s an admission of guilt on his part (my take: that’s simplistic, and probably reading too much into it.)

Right, because choosing not to air a film by a man who has faced credible accusations of sexual assault and abuse is exactly the same as a lynching.


Hey, that’s my line!


again, did he said that? I must have overlooked that sentence and I am pretty sure “string him up” isnt the same as “hang him high”. either way, woody allen is done, doesnt matter anymore if he is guilty or not.

Pretty much, yes.

Using terms like “vigilante justice” to describe the reaction to Woody Allen is nonsensical. No one has deprived Allen of his life, liberty or property. No one is seriously proposing a lynch squad or any other form of vigilanteism.

If you’re going to make a dubious historical analogy to how studios have chosen to distance themselves from some Hollywood figures tarred with scandal then a better one would be the “black lists” of the Red Scare era, not “vigilante justice.” And even that analogy only holds up if you think accusations of sexual assault and accusations of communist leanings are comparable.


99% of movies are made for 13 year old, illiterate boys (this is to make them sellable internationally - think of any recent Star Wars movie). The other 1% are way too artsy. This is why I think people ended up watching Woody Allen movies, his movies were a mixture of adult conversations and intelligent topics. We really need someone else to fill this small gap in film making.